Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

New Delta Connection Carriers

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
foreverfo said:
All of this 170/190 flying done at McDonald wages is really hurting everyone's chances of ever getting to a major. Seems the best thing to do is to bring the planes to mainline and setting a B scale or something. Surely a B scale would be higher than an "express" wage.

Anyone agree? Or am I the retard? I personally don't want to be stuck flying a pencil jet for 30 yrs to all of these markets where DC-9s and 737 used to serve at my $64/hr. I'll be more than happy serving these market at say $120/hr in something bigger. Better yet would be to get paid $120/hr to sit in the right seat doing one leg a day to Vegas and having something more than a reduced overnight! JMHO.


foreverfo,

In a perfect world under the old paradigm you would be correct about bringing the planes to mainline so that the jobs would pay more. However the paradigm has changed in this new world, the mainline jobs have already been brought down to the level of the best regionals. Senior ASA, CMR, Horizon, Air Wisc., and even senior CHQ pilots now make more than most mainline FOs. In addition, the fabulous "A fund" retirement plans that once separated "major" and "regional" jobs are all but dead. Those that aren't yet will be shortly. Finally, the fabulous schedules of the major airline pilot has also flown west. ASA CRJ 200 schedules are BETTER than any 737-200 Delta schedule and better than most MD-80 schedules.

Add to this the fact that IF a major pilot union does negotiate to fly the E170/190, they will most likely have to UNDERBID the highest paid regionals to win the bidding.

To summarize, as a senior ASA pilot, I would take a paycut, work more days, and give up vacation just for the "privledge" of flying the 170/190 at a "Major" airline. I think I'll pass and just take the larger airplanes here instead.

In hindsight, what you propose SHOULD have been done 20+ years ago with the Metro's at Eastern Express, however ALPA in it's infinite wisdom dropped the ball - or more accurately didn't see the ball coming and it is just now smacking them right between the eyes.

Joe
 
Last edited:
~~~^~~~ said:
You bring up some valid points, but are missing the bigger picture.



  • The pilots serving at the various alter egos will also want better pay and working conditions once the 18 month upgrades and paint jobs begin to fade.
  • Young crews and young equipment are always cheaper. What happens to you five years from now?
Frankly, that's not Delta's problem, that's Wexford's problem. If RAH can't keep their costs down, then they will be underbid by someone else. Delta's flying got given away to the wholly-owned carriers (that weren't always wholly-owned, of course) because they were a cheaper product. Comair/ASA's flying (well, Delta's flying) got given away to contract carriers because they are a cheaper product. Someday probably RAH's flying (well, Delta's flying) will be given away to whomever offers a cheaper product.

Delta doesn't care about disgruntled FO's at SA/CHQ/etc until those FO's cause a problem with the operation. Delta wants the shiny planes and the lower costs, to want anything different is to make a poor business case for a company that is allegedly about to go Chap. 11 and who has a stock price so low that sixty shares will buy you a carton of cigarettes.

In the end, what's good for Mother Delta is what's good for Mother Delta. If it's bad for Comair and ASA, that's just too bad to a Suit in the boardroom. It seems pretty easy to understand for someone who doesn't have anything directly vested in any of this (which I don't but assume you do).


~~~^~~~ said:
Delta's destruction of a core asset...


Just like us, you need Delta to survive.


I'm a little confused by this one. If that asset won't survive without the Delta corporate teet, how much of an asset is it? It wouldn't take long to replace ALL those wholly-owned airplanes with contractors... I think the Independence experience has shown how easy it is to lose money when all you fly (or most of what you fly) is RJ's. Especially as the price of fuel goes up the RJ's make less and less sense on their own, and the Mother Ship paying the fuel bills is all that keeps most RJ operators afloat.
 
Last edited:
Well Joe...

That's the exact thinking process that I hate to hear. We have that same thinking here at XJT. Why leave a cushy place with good schedules, working rules and QOL.?..and it's not all that great. We've had numerous guys deferr their call to go to CAL for that same thinking..it's a shame.

I knew I should of taken my dad's advice and gone into the real world with a real job to make real money...20/20 is hindsight...could of would of should of...who would of thunk it!
 
foreverfo said:
Well Joe...

That's the exact thinking process that I hate to hear. We have that same thinking here at XJT. Why leave a cushy place with good schedules, working rules and QOL.?..and it's not all that great. We've had numerous guys deferr their call to go to CAL for that same thinking..it's a shame.

I knew I should of taken my dad's advice and gone into the real world with a real job to make real money...20/20 is hindsight...could of would of should of...who would of thunk it!


This career has changed forever. I understand your frustration, but wishing it weren't true won't change anything. I once thought like you do, but now instead of treating my "next job" as the most important, I now treat my "current job" as the most important.

Good luck,
Joe
 
~~~^~~~ said:
Yes, I support the RJDC lawsuit. The RJDC effort promotes the right of employees to contract with those who have operational control of their airplanes. Eventually, this will happen and you too will benefit by binding the Company to the pilots performing the flying.

But binding a Company to its pilots is not what the RJDC seeks through its lawsuit. Furthermore, the RJDC does not differentiate between wholly owned or not. Surely you must know this. The RJDC does not believe that any pilot group can control its airline's code. You do know that, don't you?
 
FDJ2 said:
But binding a Company to its pilots is not what the RJDC seeks through its lawsuit. Furthermore, the RJDC does not differentiate between wholly owned or not. Surely you must know this. The RJDC does not believe that any pilot group can control its airline's code. You do know that, don't you?

FDJ2,
This is not correct. The RJDC does believe that a pilot group can control it's own airline's code. What the RJDC does not believe is that a pilot group can control another pilot group and still uphold ALPA's DFR.

An example would be if ASA or CMR were to start flying 737's as ASA or CMR. Outside of the Delta code, I do not believe that ALPA thru the DALMEC has a right to stop that.

The RJDC believes scope is important. How that scope is used and managed is just as important. Are we looking out for ourselves - YOU BETTCHA WE ARE!

Joe
 
FDJ: You are twisting statements and you know it. Scope binds a company to its pilots. "All Delta flying performed by Delta pilots" is an example of scope.

What you advocate is using one airline's scope to control another airlines' flying - that is not scope, it is a remote control device.

If the Delta MEC wants RJ flying, fine, take it. However, if you have no interest in performing RJ flying, then allow the pilots performing that flying to engage in the legal collective bargaining process without blocking their efforts to gain scope.

Your MEC's "remote control" of RJ flying has unleased an alter ego storm that is coming ashore on your 737's and MD88's. As your MEC votes without regard for the "industry," the rest of the industry is eating away at your seniority list (votes) and relevance (fleet size). You need the RJDC, but by the time you realize it we might be eating lunch outside an AirInc. seminar.
 
I don't think most ASA/CMR pilots should be that upset. ASA/CMR have enjoyed an unprecedented amount of growth over the last decade. This growth wasn't going to last forever, eventually the growth was going to be shifted back to mainline.

However, mainline has decided they aren't all that interested in growth, so the growth instead has gone to the contract carriers. The flying being done by the SA E170's is replacing mainline.

For example, DL is replacing 2x733 SLC-DTW with 3xE170. DL gets roughly the same capacity, better frequency and a two class product. Everyone's a winner except the DL mainline pilots. They will continue to lose as mainline shrinks.
 
~~~^~~~ said:
FDJ: You are twisting statements and you know it. Scope binds a company to its pilots. "All Delta flying performed by Delta pilots" is an example of scope.

No, I am quoting one of the RJDC's biggest supporters when he was asked a simple question.

Quote:

1. Can the DAL pilot group, or any pilot group own/control their code?






In a word, NO. The “code” under which your airline operates is not owned by the Delta pilots and it is not controlled by the Delta pilots. The “code” is owned by Delta Air Lines, Inc. and they alone “control” it. The same applies to other “codes” owned by other airlines.


I'm not twisting any statements, that's a direct quote.




What you advocate is using one airline's scope to control another airlines' flying - that is not scope, it is a remote control device.

No, you are advocating the elimination of a pilots group's right to bind his company to his contract by eliminating scope. I am simply advocating the right of a pilot group (DALPA) to limit the outsourcing of it's company's code (DL). Again, you have no right to a single hour of DL code flying, it's not your code or your flying. The fact that you chose to work for a contractor is your problem.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top